They have a distinctly different history & membership makeup. You shall know them by the fruits of their labors, and if that is at all true, then they are not related groups. There is an easy to make connection between the ofiginal Illuminati Group in Europe and the foundation of the secretive fraternaty on Yale campus known as the "Loyal order of Skull and bones". On that note, in the first hundred years or so of the US, nearly every presidential administration had at least one known Mason, many times that was the POTUS himself. Around 1900 that trend came to an end, and since then nearly every administration has had a member of the Loyal Order of Skull & bones (known as 'bonesmen') in positions of authority. Such notable examples of Bonesmen in the Executive branch have included both Bushs & Bill Clinton; so up until Obama, it's been at least as far back as Carter since there was not a bonesman that was either the POTUS or vice, and there is no way to be certain that other bonesmen haven't held other significant positions.
So.... If the Masons did build the US, perhaps it would be best to get them back in control.... Depends upon what you think is ideal. If we keep doing what we have been doing we will keep getting what we've been getting. I can't say that the caliber of the membership today is anything like what it was in 1776. |
|
|
|
Can you please expand more on the connection between Masons and World Jewish Government?
Unbelievable. EDIT: never assume that there is only one conspiracy, whenever a set of several competing conspiracies could explain events as well or better. Occam's Razor applies here. The Illuminati are not the Freemasons, even though they do have overlapping sets of symbolism. ..and you know this how? They have a distinctly different history & membership makeup. You shall know them by the fruits of their labors, and if that is at all true, then they are not related groups. There is an easy to make connection between the ofiginal Illuminati Group in Europe and the foundation of the secretive fraternaty on Yale campus known as the "Loyal order of Skull and bones". On that note, in the first hundred years or so of the US, nearly every presidential administration had at least one known Mason, many times that was the POTUS himself. Around 1900 that trend came to an end, and since then nearly every administration has had a member of the Loyal Order of Skull & bones (known as 'bonesmen') in positions of authority. Such notable examples of Bonesmen in the Executive branch have included both Bushs & Bill Clinton; so up until Obama, it's been at least as far back as Carter since there was not a bonesman that was either the POTUS or vice, and there is no way to be certain that other bonesmen haven't held other significant positions. |
|
|
|
Can you please expand more on the connection between Masons and World Jewish Government?
Unbelievable. EDIT: never assume that there is only one conspiracy, whenever a set of several competing conspiracies could explain events as well or better. Occam's Razor applies here. The Illuminati are not the Freemasons, even though they do have overlapping sets of symbolism. |
|
|
|
There is no record of them anywhere ever again.
Yeah, there is: William and Henry Sinclair who built the Roslyn Chapel. I know one of their direct descendants. They weren't called Knights Templar anymore, nor were they when they fled France. They did end up with a few ships, but certainly not all 16. I believe they were called the Kights of Christ in Portugal, probably took other names elsewhere. EDIT: Some more ships ended up in Malta, where the Templars survived in name until the island was conquered by islamists who burned the Templar Archives there around 16/1700. |
|
|
|
Another tibit. When the KT were fleeing Europe, they had about 16 ships docked in France. The Friday the 13th order was leaked to many of the Knights, and overnight those docked ships left port. There is no record of them anywhere ever again. While it's possible that they dispersed and altered their appearences in order to blend, one theory is that the sailors were carrying the famous KT 'treasure' and took it to Nova Scotia and buried it into a complicated pit vault. http://www.oakislandtreasure.co.uk/ |
|
|
|
How many security firms do you want to choose from? Five? Let's say five. So to equal the density of a municipal police force, that would mean five times as many officers employed at those security firms. That's five times as many officers being paid.
Wanna try making sense? If you replaced the current police force with 5 private agencies, that doesn't mean there are five times as many officers. What kind of dumbass logic is that?!?! It just means that each firm will be one fifth the size of the former monopoly. People aren't going to change careers just because there are more companies to choose from. So you want a security firm that has only one fifth the number of feet on the ground than what has presumably been determined to be an adequate number? Assuming the same coverage, they will have one fifth the density. Due to the random nature of crime, there will be times when your call for help will result in a much longer response time than occurs now. There's no way around it. From a logical point of view, all you need to do is take the notion to the extreme to see the problem. First of all, just because a publicly funded police force has a certain number of cops, does not imply that that number is optimum. Second, in every city that I've lived in there were always the city cops, the county sherriffs (and contables), the state cops and the city cops of the surrounding suburban cities. All of these different units communicated fine and seemed to manage the distribution of workload without significant problems. There is no reason to assume that several private security units working in an overlapping geographical area couldn't manage to do the same. The 911 operators generally have to choose which unit to call, and have radios that can switch frequencies to do exactly that (or call the different units' own dispatchers to do it). |
|
|
|
Can you please expand more on the connection between Masons and World Jewish Government?
Unbelievable. EDIT: never assume that there is only one conspiracy, whenever a set of several competing conspiracies could explain events as well or better. Occam's Razor applies here. |
|
|
|
Another little tibit. Look at one of the symbols, the 'square & compass'. Draw a line connecting the tips of the compass, and another line connecting the corners of the square. What do you have?
A somewhat mishapen 6-pointed star. I am not going to speculate on why you pointed that out, however. I'll let you dig your own hole on that one (or not, as the case may be). Speculate away, as I don't intend on expounding further. The masonic rings are interesting as well, as they don't generally have the more common 'square & compass'. Usually they have a triangle with 'the eye of providence', a Capital 'G' or this symbol... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YodhAfter all, the eye is kinda creepy even to masons. Draw whatever conclusions you will. |
|
|
|
The principal reason why the Qur’ân has delivered such a harsh verdict against interest is that Islam wishes to establish an economic system where all forms of exploitation are eliminated, and particularly the injustice perpetuated in the form of the financier being assured of a positive return without doing any work or sharing in the risk, while the entrepreneur, in spite of his management and hard work, is not assured of such a positive return. Islam wishes to establish justice between the financier and the entrepreneur. Under these circumstances it is difficult to see how anyone could justify interest in an Islamic society. The difficulty to understand the prohibition comes from lack of appreciation of the whole complex of Islamic values, and particularly its uncompromising emphasis on socio-economic justice and equitable distribution of income and wealth. Any attempt to treat the prohibition of ribâ as an isolated religious injunction and not as an integral part of the Islamic economic order with its overall ethos, goals and values is bound to create confusion.
http://www.albaraka.co.za/Islamic_Banking/Prohibition_of_interest/Has_Islam_really_prohibited_interest.aspxI agree with this post, generally, but the focus on interest (riba) by the Koran obscures the greater problem. The JudeoChristian focus on usury as interest does likewise. By doing so, the banksters can still get their risk free gains by other means, simply by calling it something different. For example, the charging of interest for loans denominated in gold in the US has long been illegal, simply because govco doesn't want to imply that gold is still money. So gold is no longer 'loaned' at 'interest'; instead it's 'leased' at a 'rental rate'. The end result being exactly the same. |
|
|
|
I wonder if the question "Are Freemasons Anarchists/limited government advocates?" has ever been put to them, and what the answer would be....
The answer would be "no", for that question falls into the realm of political ideology, which is also generally verboten. Historically, however, individuals seemed to have leaned that way from well before 1776. The Green Dragon Tavern, where the original Boston Tea Party was planned, was a masonic lodge that was also used as a public bar and community center. ( http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/history/boston_tea_party.html) At least half of the known participants in the Boston Tea Party were masons. Ben Franklin was livid about this while he served as emmissary to the King in London, he regarded it as a violation of property rights. Adam Smith, the economist who wrote, The Wealth of Nations was likely a mason; but his documents were ordered burned after his death. ( http://www2.gol.com/users/lodge1/history-e/papers/terasawa.html) Thomas Paine, who wrote Common Sense, was certainly not a freemason at that time, but openly theorized about their origins and purpose. ( http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/history/paine_t.html) Considering that masons cannot discuss such things in public, he certainly was not one at this point. However, in due course he stopped discussing such things in public, and reportedly refused to do so upon prompting later in life; which implies that he became one himself later in life. Another little tibit. Look at one of the symbols, the 'square & compass'. Draw a line connecting the tips of the compass, and another line connecting the corners of the square. What do you have? |
|
|
|
which code did you use ?
Apparently one that had already been redeemed. I didn't realize that I needed a unique one. Can I get one? ok , sent pm with code  next in line Flowz, code will be sent soon Redeemed! Again! Would that be reredeemed? |
|
|
|
A guy posts what is actually a very important topic concerning bitcoin: Masonic control of the current banking system, and gets trolled hard.
Well, the people on this thread pooh-poohing this topic might be idiots but are more likely their disinfo agents. You're an absolute moron if you can't tell the masons run the US monetary system - they put their symbols on the money itself. George Washington, Major in the British Army and 33rd degree Grandmaster is on the $1 bill.
Now bring your asshole ad hominem posts about me being a conspiracy theorist and "looney" - its all you really have. You shitheads certainly can't argue with any substance - any character in your respective families died off 2 generations ago.
<sigh> How about some historical facts, and lets see if you guys can assemble another kind of theory of what freemasonary is actually about. (taken from a website with a bias, but true nonetheless, emphasis is mine) http://watch.pair.com/mason.html"One recent historical account of Freemasonry, THE TEMPLE & THE LODGE, boast instead of the profound influence of Freemasonry on the founding documents, (while carefully trying to avoid creating the impression of a Masonic conspiracy): "Of the fifty-six signatories of the Declaration of Independence, only nine can definitely be identified as Freemasons, while ten others may possibly have been. Of the general officers in the Continental Army, there were so far as documentation can establish, thirty-three Freemasons out of seventy-four. Granted the known Freemasons were, as a rule, more prominent, more instrumental in shaping the course of events than their unaffiliated colleagues...
"On 11 June, (the Continental) Congress appointed a committee to draft a declaration of independence. Of the five men on this committee, two - Franklin and...Robert Livingston - were Freemasons, and one, Robert Sherman, is believed, though not confirmed, to have been. The other two, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams - were not, despite subsequent claims to the contrary. The text of the declaration was composed by Jefferson. It was submitted to Congress and accepted on 4 July 1776. The nine signatories who can now be established as proven Freemasons, and the ten who were possibly so, included such influential figures as Washington, Franklin and, of course, the president of the Congress, John Hancock. The army, moreover, remained almost entirely in Freemasonic hands...As we shall see, it is in the Constitution that the influence of Freemasonry is most discernible...
"At last, on 25 May 1787, the Constitutional Convention opened in Philadelphia and commenced its efforts to devise the machinery of government for the new nation. The first voice to make itself heard in any significantly influential way was a characteristically Freemasonic one, that of Edmund Randolph.. Randolph...a member of a Williamsburg lodge, had become Washington's aide-de-camp. Subsequently he was to become Attorney-General, then governor of Virginia and Grand Master of Virginia's Grand Lodge. During Washington's presidency, he was to serve as the first Attorney-General of the United States, then the first Secretary of State.
"...There were ultimately five dominant and guiding spirits behind the Constitution - Washington, Franklin, Randolph, Jefferson and John Adams. Of these, the first three were active Freemasons, but men who took their Freemasonry extremely seriously - men who subscribed fervently to its ideals, whose entire orientation had been shaped and conditioned by it. And Adam's position, though he himself is not known to have been a Freemason was virtually identical to theirs. When he became president, moreover, he appointed a prominent Freemason, John Marshall, as first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court." (1)
"
Now, feel free to research the lives of these men on your own, particularly those names that you do not know, and ask yourself, "do the lives these men led imply that they were party to some grand cabal to subjugate humanity?". If the answer to that question is no, ask yourself why that might be. Furthermore... ( http://www.rosslyntemplars.org.uk/) I am going to assert (because I can't prove it) that Freemasonry (in general) is a branch of the Knights Templar. Freemasonry as we know of it today was officially founded on June 24th, 1717. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasonry) However, there exists known documents that used the Masonic codes at least as far back as 1390 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masonic_manuscripts) therefore blowing the OP's assertion that they were founded with the Bank of England to hell. The Scotish Freemasonry (the oldest form known) is also known to be deeply tied to the Rosslyn Chapel ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosslyn_Chapel) as Masonic symbolism is all over the stonework of the chapel. The Rosslyn Chaple was commishined by the Sinclair family, who were deeply tied to the Knights Templar prior to the breakup of that order in 1305 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Templar#Arrests.2C_charges.2C_and_dissolution). Prior to that event, the Knights were deeply involved in finance across all of Europe & the Middle East. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Knights_Templar#Bankers) Therefore, the OP's assertion that MAsons are tied to international banking is likely true, but not necessarily malicious, for they used full reserve & gold standard banking, and regarded anything less as fraud. Furthermore, a different branch of those KT that were fleeing persecution in the 1300's found refuge in what is now Switzerland. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%BCtlischwur) This involves the classic story of William Tell, which conviently leaves out much detail concerning his miltary forces, who managed to defeat a tyranical regent in open battle using local & foreign troops agaisnt a much larger force. Tactics were never discused, but the fleeing KT would, of course, been quite a powerful & well trained group of mercs to have on your side. In return, it's reasonable to assume that those same KT found political refuge in those mountain cantons. It's also true that for hundreds of years Switzerland was the nexus of secret & gold standard international banking & finance. Incidentally, Switzerland was not only the first nation on Earth to recognize the independent soverignty of the US, but was the first to lend it money for it's war effort; and the last to surrender the gold standard. Again, not the kind of actions one might expect from a grand cabal bent towards world domination via finance, particularly centered around the Bank of England. Furthermore, it's more than possible that the organization is older still than the KT, for there is some evidence that the secrecy of the organization extends all the way to the foundation of the actual Temple of Soloman, makning the term "freemasons" an inside joke. (blocklayers & stonecutters are 'masons' you see, and they are 'freed' men) I could easily go on, and I have another challenge for you guys. While it's true that masons are sworn to not discuss Freemasonry with anyone not in the order, they are most certainly permitted to tell you what it's not. It's the 'negative affirmation' method of discovery. You can ask about the facts that I've presented, and then ask "is it true?" If it is, they cannot answer you. If they believe that it is false, they can. Here are some other questions to ask... "Are Freemasons Diests?" You might have to explain this term. The answer will be "no". Freemasonry requires a sworn belief in a monotheistic God, although it is not, itself, a religion; and theological discussions are generally verboten inside a masonic temple. They really are not about that. "Do the masonic ceremonies refer to the original Temple of Soloman?" They cannot answer this question. And I dare anyone to claim that i'm some kind of agent of disinformation. |
|
|
|
which code did you use ?
Apparently one that had already been redeemed. I didn't realize that I needed a unique one. Can I get one? |
|
|
|
Our current system does have some creditor responsibility in the form of the bankruptcy mechanism, but the problem with this is that the level of creditor responsibility is not fluid - it's an either/or, pay in full or utterly default, situation. This is far from an accurate description of bankruptcy proceedings. And there are a number of different versions of bankruptcy that runs the spectrum from total default to partial liquidation of defautor's assets to simply the court ordered extension of repayment period. |
|
|
|
That is a common misquote of a biblical passage, that is improperly used to demonize money. The literal translation of the passage is...
"For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs."
1 Timothy 6:10 New American Standard Bible
I'll see your New American Standard and raise you the original Greek: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/gnt/ti1006.htm#010Specifically: ῥίζα γὰρ πάντων τῶν κακῶν ἐστιν ἡ φιλαργυρία Literally = "for the root of all the evils is the love of money". Any Ancient Greek scholars want to explore this one further? Dictionary is here if you want one: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=r%28iza&la=greek#lexiconI'm not sure, but Timothy may have originally been in Aramaic, not Greek. Either way, the transalation is matter of opinion and I hold the opinion of the professional translators for the New American Standard in higher regard than I do yours. No offence. |
|
|
|
Therefore usury is a special case of fraud, that pretends to be legitimate via the creative and/or deceptive use of mathmatics to present itself as an honest contract.
Now this is an interesting point. Would you say that a loan that had a high interest rate, but was clearly explained, would be usury? I don't consider the actual interest rate the defining factor. If you're giving a loan of only 3% to someone you know is a gambling addict & accepting his house as collateral, it's arguablely predetory lending. Particularly if he has a wife & kids that live in that house who had no say in the house being used as collateral for the loan. Granted, the gambler has his own contributions to the fraud, and it's not a fraud if there was no way that the lender could have known in advance that his customer was likely to default. The key is, would a reasonable third party be able to tell, in advance of the finalization of the contract, that the defaulter was likely to default under the conditions, whether or not that was his intent. The valid goal of both parties is to repay the loan according to the terms. If either party is being deceptive, and expects the loan to fail in some other way in advance, fraud was committed even if it cannot be proven to a third party (court). If it was the lender using predatory practices, it's usury. If it was the borrower, it was another kind of fraud. What about a loan that had a low apparent rate, but by clever use of mathematics, say, compounding the interest every 30 seconds, had a deceptively high return?
Again, see above. And compounding interest every 30 seconds is irrelevant. One can compound continuously, if the APR remains proper. Yes, it's possible to compound continously and do so fairly; many corporate/business loans work this way. But the math is even more complicated, so using continueous compounding in a consumer loan is suspicious, if for no other reason that it's difficulty for the lender to compute properly makes them uncommon. |
|
|
|
not sure if anyone asked, are these waterproof?
judging from what i've seen i would guess yes, the final product can be waterproof - maybe not for deep-diving but it would survive a shower. the development prototypes have some holes, though so i would not try it with them. It only needs to be able to survive a washing machine & dryer. I was thinking more along the lines of taking ladders and a truck around town to super-glue them to tops of things. If it will survive the washing machine, it will do fine on the top of a vending machine. |
|
|
|
|
A nanocell then. Sorry, I have no use for that.
|
|
|
|
|
And what is an airave used for?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
